The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint about two Penalty Charge Notices he received for alleged moving traffic contraventions. This is because it was reasonable for Mr B to put in representations to the Council, and if needed, appeal to London Tribunals.
The complaint
Mr B complains about two Penalty Charge Notices (PCNs) he received from the Council for alleged moving traffic contraventions. Mr B says the notices did not warn him that if he paid the charge at the reduced rate he would not be able to challenge the PCN. Mr B also says the PCNs should not have been issued because this traffic restriction is not clearly signed.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
The Act says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone has a right of appeal, reference or review to a tribunal about the same matter. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to use this right. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(a), as amended) London Tribunals considers parking and moving traffic offence appeals for London.
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by Mr B. I have also considered the PCNs Mr B complains about which have been provided by the Council.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
In both PCNs the Council told Mr B he had the opportunity to put in formal representations to the Council to challenge them. The PCNs also told Mr B that If the Council rejected his representations, he would have a right of appeal to London Tribunals.
This is the process set out in law to challenge a PCN and we generally expect a motorist to use this process.
I find it was reasonable for Mr B to make representations to the Council, and if needed, put in an appeal to London Tribunals.
The Tribunal is independent and in the best position to decide whether a PCN was properly issued, including whether a traffic restriction is appropriately signed. Also, the process is free and relatively straightforward to use.
Mr B complains the PCNs did not warn him that he could not pay a PCN at the discounted rate and challenge it. But, the PCNs told Mr B that if his representations were rejected he would need to pay the PCN in full or put in an appeal. So, I find the PCNs did make it clear that Mr B could not make representations and still have the opportunity to pay the PCNs at the discounted rate.
So, we will not investigate this complaint.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint because it was reasonable for him to make representations, and if needed, put in an appeal to London Tribunals.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman